Jump to content
Paulzx

Headphone distortion vs speakers

Recommended Posts

How come when I listen to a song in my tiny closet with the door closed it sounds different than when I listen to the same song in my barn?

  • Haha 2
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Paulzx said:

It's not an EQ thing, it's more like a completely different device is creating the distortion.

 

Welcome to the world of physics.

 

Small speakers will distort earlier and probably more than big speakers (unless they are made with inferior components).

 

You know how headphones, IEM and ear buds have very tiny small speakers and guitars cabs, P.A. rigs and studio monitors have big huge speakers in comparison. Well, that's just the way it works.

 

https://www.quora.com/Do-physically-larger-speakers-sound-better-than-smaller-ones-when-played-at-the-same-volume

 

Hope this helps/makes sense.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Paulzx said:

 

This is where I disagree with you. I don't think any tweaking will replicate that sound. It's not an EQ thing, it's more like a completely different device is creating the distortion. Try it and you'll see what I mean

 

A completely different device IS creating the sound. Your chosen output device accounts for a tremendous % of your tone...headphones are not studio monitors, and studio monitors are not a PA. And like it or not, EQ is the way out. The only way. Will you ever achieve 100%, indistinguishable continuity between headphones and other output methods? Probably not... because they are very different, they're used in different ways, and that will never change. If you want to though, you can get damn close... but not until you accept what's happening in the first place.

 

I have successfully navigated around this issue for years, not because I'm omniscient or some kind of savant, but because I learned how... stumbling along the way like everybody else. You can disagree all you want... but your predicament is not new, nor is your reaction to it... the steadfast rejection of what's actually going on is the default response of many. You'll find 1000 other threads around here documenting the exact same sequence of events. The same initial question, the same answers provided, and the same "Nope. Can't be." blanket rejection of said answers... it actually gets rather tiresome. We'd all love a miraculous solution that allows for identical tones to emerge, completely independent of what we're monitoring through, and the volume at which we're listening, but that isn't gonna happen, because it's impossible. Your only option is to make it happen with the appropriate adjustments. It's work. Annoying, time consuming, and at times difficult work... but on the bright side, you only have to do it once.

 

You get used to monitoring with one particular output method, and when you switch to another it's a gut punch, because all of a sudden it sounds nothing like what you're used to hearing, and initially it can be a bit confusing as to why. But that doesn't change the fact that  there's precisely one answer, which multiple people have already provided... and it is straightforward: Dial in your sounds through the same output, and at or close to the same volume as you intend to use them. Hit 'save'. Often. 

 

Or keep searching for a magic bullet that doesn't exist. No matter how convinced you are that you'll be the guy to find it, you won't. This is all about the physics of sound production of various different devices, how and at what proximity they interact with your ears,  and the biology of perception. You can't win a fight with any of those things... you can only learn to work around them, and manipulate your gear so that it produces something useful.

 

 

 

 

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/9/2021 at 6:59 PM, MGW-Alberta said:

Yes, it should.  I would start by turning the mix down to zero and if it's too sharp or in-your-face you can slowly dial some IR back in.

Okay so I tried this and I know what you mean, it creates a somewhat sharper tone, quite phasey, almost unrealistic sounding but interesting. It doesn't really sound like what I was referring to originally but it an interesting tip and I will experiment with it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, SaschaFranck said:

 

Your earbuds probably.

Head phones were the same as the earbuds, it's just using that headphone method of listening as opposed to using speakers. Maybe the headphone sound is the genuine sound and the speakers are just generating a completely different sound that just will never be the same

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, datacommando said:

 

Welcome to the world of physics.

 

Small speakers will distort earlier and probably more than big speakers (unless they are made with inferior components).

 

You know how headphones, IEM and ear buds have very tiny small speakers and guitars cabs, P.A. rigs and studio monitors have big huge speakers in comparison. Well, that's just the way it works.

 

https://www.quora.com/Do-physically-larger-speakers-sound-better-than-smaller-ones-when-played-at-the-same-volume

 

Hope this helps/makes sense.

 

 

 

Makes sense of course, just a bit frustrating that you can hear it using one method which you like but can't really replicate it the other way. I can get high gain tones no problem on the speakers, it's just a different type of high gain, not quite as good

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Paulzx said:

….. Maybe the headphone sound is the genuine sound ….

I would say there’s no such thing as the ‘genuine’ sound. Each sound wave transmitter (speakers, headphones, a tree falling in the forest, …) produces its own genuine sound waveform, and each sound wave receiver (ears/brain, microphones, DAW, …) creates it own genuine perception of that particular sound waveform.

 

If there’s no receiver can the waveform itself, being carried through the air unperceived, be called ‘sound’?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Paulzx said:

it's just a different type of high gain, not quite as good

 

For you, apparently. A large percentage of the guitar playing, amp modeler using population however wouldn't agree. Personally, if it was possible, I would never wear a pair of headphones ever again. Not as a musician, not as a music consumer, not as a guitar playing amp modeling user.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, cruisinon2 said:

 

A completely different device IS creating the sound. Your chosen output device accounts for a tremendous % of your tone...headphones are not studio monitors, and studio monitors are not a PA. And like it or not, EQ is the way out. The only way. Will you ever achieve 100%, indistinguishable continuity between headphones and other output methods? Probably not... because they are very different, they're used in different ways, and that will never change. If you want to though, you can get damn close... but not until you accept what's happening in the first place.

 

I have successfully navigated around this issue for years, not because I'm omniscient or some kind of savant, but because I learned how... stumbling along the way like everybody else. You can disagree all you want... but your predicament is not new, nor is your reaction to it... the steadfast rejection of what's actually going on is the default response of many. You'll find 1000 other threads around here documenting the exact same sequence of events. The same initial question, the same answers provided, and the same "Nope. Can't be." blanket rejection of said answers... it actually gets rather tiresome. We'd all love a miraculous solution that allows for identical tones to emerge, completely independent of what we're monitoring through, and the volume at which we're listening, but that isn't gonna happen, because it's impossible. Your only option is to make it happen with the appropriate adjustments. It's work. Annoying, time consuming, and at times difficult work... but on the bright side, you only have to do it once.

 

You get used to monitoring with one particular output method, and when you switch to another it's a gut punch, because all of a sudden it sounds nothing like what you're used to hearing, and initially it can be a bit confusing as to why. But that doesn't change the fact that  there's precisely one answer, which multiple people have already provided... and it is straightforward: Dial in your sounds through the same output, and at or close to the same volume as you intend to use them. Hit 'save'. Often. 

 

Or keep searching for a magic bullet that doesn't exist. No matter how convinced you are that you'll be the guy to find it, you won't. This is all about the physics of sound production of various different devices, how and at what proximity they interact with your ears,  and the biology of perception. You can't win a fight with any of those things... you can only learn to work around them, and manipulate your gear so that it produces something useful.

 

 

 

 

 

Agree with your conclusion, you do just have to work around it, and accept you can't totally reproduce some stuff like that, I had actually said that before anyway.

 

To be totally fair, if I get closer to the monitor speakers and listen a bit more carefully, I can hear that the basic tone through the speaker is more like the thing I'm chasing, but by the time you've stepped back into a more suitable listening distance from the speakers, it's not as obvious, so maybe those HS5's are just too small to really project that detail in the sound. Unless you have an endless supply of speakers to compare against, it's hard to know what the differences would be to comment on that.

 

I'll know next week, at least compared to the HS7 as I'm swapping over to those specifically to test this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Paulzx said:

Unless you have an endless supply of speakers to compare against, it's hard to know what the differences would be to comment on that.


Oh dear, you appear to have fallen down the rabbit hole, chasing that elusive Will o’the Wisp that is simply - vibrations in the air!

 

Your predicament of trying to get a grip on this is just another one of the seemingly endless circle of people posting the same thing on these forums, over and over. It has been done to death.

 

When you finally achieve your audio nirvana please let us know, then we can all disagree with that.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Paulzx said:

Okay so I tried this and I know what you mean, it creates a somewhat sharper tone, quite phasey, almost unrealistic sounding but interesting. It doesn't really sound like what I was referring to originally but it an interesting tip and I will experiment with it

There are pros and cons between using IRs versus the cab sims that come with Helix.  Cab sims give you control over lots of parameters but no mix control that I ever found on the cab blocks that I've tried.  I admit I have not tried them all but I think it's not likely that some would have it and others not but I guess I could be wrong.  IRs don't have that flexibility but they do have a mix control.  You can fool around with the mix to try to get some "reality" back into your sound.  I'm guessing you could find at least a partial path forward to your goal; get you closer.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Paulzx said:

 

Agree with your conclusion, you do just have to work around it, and accept you can't totally reproduce some stuff like that, I had actually said that before anyway.

 

To be totally fair, if I get closer to the monitor speakers and listen a bit more carefully, I can hear that the basic tone through the speaker is more like the thing I'm chasing, but by the time you've stepped back into a more suitable listening distance from the speakers, it's not as obvious, so maybe those HS5's are just too small to really project that detail in the sound. Unless you have an endless supply of speakers to compare against, it's hard to know what the differences would be to comment on that.

 

I'll know next week, at least compared to the HS7 as I'm swapping over to those specifically to test this

 

Let me save you the suspense...you can't "new gear" your way out of this problem.... because the monitors are not the problem. And the headphones are not the problem. The problem is that the monitors are monitors, and the headphones are headphones...you could spend the rest of your life trying to make one behave like the other, and you will fail. Every time. You must adapt to what they are capable of doing, because they're not gonna change...their frequency responses and projection capabilities are what they are. As such, you could invest in a pair of every model of studio monitor on earth, and none of those will sound just like your headphones, either. It's a losing battle. The need to make EQ adjustments from one output to another is inevitable, and that will never change. Learning to use different pieces of gear as they are intended to be used, and accepting the strengths and limitations of each, is the only way to get happy results. Anything else is an unattainable fantasy.

 

Either way, good luck...I have no intention of repeating myself any further. It'll either sink in eventually, or it won't.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, let's have a look into the audio engineering world.


I guess we can all agree that there's some music sounding pretty great through pretty much any playback devices. Heck, certain productions even sound pretty decent through smartphone speakers. For audio engineers, when it comes to certain kinds of music, it's one of the most crucial tasks to make things sound at least acceptable when being played through a broad range of playback systems, be it fat club PAs, the cheap consumer earbuds coming with your smartphone, the archetypical kitchen radio, the car stereo, ths supermarket sound system and anything inbetween.

 

Now, with some music, there's exceptions. You won't mix classical music with the intention to make it sound great neither through a car stereo nor through smartphone speakers. You also wouldn't mix a techno track which is mainly/ultimately supposed to blast you away when played through a club PA to sound exactly great through any other playback system.

In addition, not that this is actually done, but you could possibly even optimize your mix to sound best through smartphone speakers (it'd likely have no bass and plenty of pretty pronounced mids).

 

However,  the "average" production usually is mixed so it will sound at least fine on a vast amount of playback systems. And it seems to work. "Highway to Hell" (just to name any random more or less popular guitar based hit) doesn't sound like a totally different piece of music on your smartphone, not even when you do a straight A/B comparison to your big bucks home HiFi system. Oh yes, you will likely enjoy it a lot more when listening through the latter, but still, you can make out pretty much all relevant information through any other playback system. Heck, it's not unlikely you could even tell that the guitars are sounding pretty great (in case you think they're sounding great) when listening through the mentioned smarphone speakers.

 

Now, what all the engineers involved in such productions are doing, would be to crosscheck their mixes through a whole variety of playback systems. This is why you find a pair of cheap monitors on pretty much any studio desk. This is also why you'd leave your studio with your attempts copied to your smartphone, so you could listen to them while driving or biking home in your car stereo or through earbuds under less than desirable listening conditions.

 

Alright, in case you wouldn't know already: Why am I posting this? Because modern amp modeling suddenly brought all that to the guitarists table.

In pre-modeling times, all you had to do is to plug your guitar into whatever amps, be happy (hopefully at least) and get away with it. Anything else was left to others. You usually wouldn't play that amp through headphones (unlike it was a cheesy practice amp with HP out). you wouldn't play it through studio monitors (unless you had options to properly mic it up and maybe even isolate it beforehand) and you wouldn't be responsible for the final guitar sound coming through the PA at your band's gig.
 

Now, in fact pretty much all of a sudden (given that truly decent guitar modeling is really only available in an affordable way for less than a decade), all these precious new toys are in our hands. Along with additional duties. Hence, instead of just being guitar slingers, we do as well need to aquire audio engineering skills - at least in case we actually want to make this thing to sound decent through more than just one single playback device. We never had to care about Fletcher-Munson with our good old analog amps as we'd just crank them up until they sounded great. We also didn't have to care about the possible differences of typical fullrange monitors vs. coaxial ones. Or about how an amp would sound through consumer earbuds. All this was left to other, partially highly specialized, skilled people with typically years of experience. The same years of experience we've been spending to aquire some fretboard skills - and being a good audio engineer isn't any less challenging.

 

Having said all that (sorry for the long blurb already): How could we even remotely expect modeler makers to take care of all the mentioned things, so using a modeler would be as much of a plug-and-play experience as using a typical, oldfashioned analog guitar amp? Right, we simply can't. With modelers, while plug-and-play may still sometimes work, it doesn't really do. The presets (or default settings) you'll find on a modeler are made under certain conditions (as a sidenote: compare that to the Marshall stack you were checking in a music store's amp cabin, no presets or defaults...). It is now our task to make them sound good through a variety of playback systems - or at least through those we are using. And as I posted all that blurb above: That in itself is an art form of its own already. It takes learning, it takes experience and it takes time. Not as much learning, experience and time as becoming a full stop audio engineer, but still a considerable amount.

 

Finally, sort of back to topic: So, your modeler patches only sound great through earbuds (or whatever other singular system)? Well, ok, either get away with it or learn how to make them translate well to other playback systems. It's really no different to the first mixes you've done in your home studio. Take them to your car, crank the stereo up and you'd think the world would cease to exist because of all the bass you've dialed in due to your affordable "studio" monitors only going as low as 80Hz whereas your car might have whatever bass reinforcement to impress whomever passing by while standing in a traffic jam. Or slap them onto your smartphone for a cringeworthy ear drum adventure, simply because all the smooth high end that sounded so great on your studio monitors all of a sudden becomes a shrill desaster.

As said, either get away with it and stick to whatever headphones forever or aquire some skills. It does take some of those, no way around it. Might come in easy, but it might as well not. There's more than enough people who went back to more traditional setups (for example such as in running their modelers through typical guitar cabs) because all these audio engineering aspects weren't their thing (which I can perfectly understand, even if doesn't seem to be an issue for myself).

Decide for yourself, but don't expect modelers to deliver any kind of magic sauce allowing us to ignore all these aspects. It's simply not possible, and it's got exactly nothing to do with modeling quality.

 

Ah, ok, a little spin off, as I was already talking about home studio experiences and sound translation: One of my first forays in the land of digital home production (I have been doing this in the analog days already) was to create a little intro for my band while we were entering the stage. I had just discovered Waves' MaxxBass plugin. And wow, it sounded sooo great at home (through some probably less than average monitors), still pretty decent through the vocal PA in the rehearsal room. Now, the first time we checked this intro out on an actual venue, during soundcheck our FOH dude was slamming the CD in and just pressed start - with the FOH volume still cranked up. It was a rather huge open air festival, so the sound stacks and subwoofers were, well, "decent", to put it mildly. Intro started, sounded ok. I had used an oh-so-creative telephone sound effect in the beginning. So the FOH dude kept running it at volume. Just that the thin-ish first 16 bars were followed by a HUGE kick/bass hit and a rather massive loop. Well... -  that was when MaxxBass proved it was worth the name. It's been no less than the entire stage shaking, pretty much as if there was a leave-noone-behind earthquake erasing the world. Fortunately, our FOH guy reacted quickly, but it was still everybody in the entire place standing there completely shocked for a moment, looking at each other in a "wow, we're still alive!" fashion. So much for sounds that translate well (I later on analysed the evil work I've created and it had an *incredible* amount of bass energy around 30Hz, something completely ignored by my monitors and the rehearsal room PA).
I'm absolutely confident that this intro would've been just fine on earbuds, too...

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, SaschaFranck said:

Now, in fact pretty much all of a sudden (given that truly decent guitar modeling is really only available in an affordable way for less than a decade), all these precious new toys are in our hands. Along with additional duties. Hence, instead of just being guitar slingers, we do as well need to aquire audio engineering skills - at least in case we actually want to make this thing to sound decent through more than just one single playback device. We never had to care about Fletcher-Munson with our good old analog amps as we'd just crank them up until they sounded great. We also didn't have to care about the possible differences of typical fullrange monitors vs. coaxial ones. Or about how an amp would sound through consumer earbuds. All this was left to other, partially highly specialized, skilled people with typically years of experience. The same years of experience we've been spending to aquire some fretboard skills - and being a good audio engineer isn't any less challenging.


Of all the things you said, THIS is the most key statement and was an early insight for me when I first began modeling.  I believe I characterized it as a modeler is really just a recording studio in a box, but without the ability to record, and that really got me past the idea that a single preset was going to be sufficient for every possible use case.  This is one of the main reasons one of the first things I'll ask someone when they're having a problem dialing in their Helix is "what exactly are you trying to use it for?" because that truly determines the best fit for what you might need to use to dial it in.  It's just not a one-size-fits-all world when it comes to modeling.

Even when it comes to live productions no single output methodology will work best for all.  That's the real beauty of the Helix design.  They took all of that into account allowing the user to decide about what output configuration will work best for them.  I've always been a huge fan of using full range powered speakers in my stage productions.  But that's because I cover a wide range of musical styles and rarely perform live in a situation where all instruments and voices don't go through a decent/modern PA setup.  But my most recent experiences tell a real tale of the challenges of crossing that line between different applications of modeling in the studio and in a live presentation.

Over the last couple of months I've begun using a hybrid configuration of components in my band's live performances.  We have live instruments which we use to play in a traditional way through a PA, but I've incorporated a process using Ableton Live which allows me to integrate recorded instrument tracks into our live productions in order to broaden our ability to address different types and styles of songs in a more authentic manner.  This isn't something new as many live big name performers have been doing this for some time, but it is something new for playing at local club and festival levels.  In my home I have both a recording studio setup and a live rehearsal setup.  I have to build these instrument tracks in my studio and then bring them over into my live production setup.  This means I develop the studio tracks using keyboard/MIDI controllers, instrument sample libraries and studio monitors and that resulting track is then played (along with live instruments) through a live production PA setup.

One of the things I've had to take into account in doing this is the difference in how the different systems present the sounds.  What sounds great and authentic in the studio such as a Hammond B3 with a Leslie can mix very poorly in a live production using powered full range speakers.  Due the the nature of how the system works live, it's not reasonable to make changes to the mixing board between different tracks being used that contain different instruments.  Every track has to be contoured with how it will mix and present itself in a live environment because the two environments are dramatically different in how they're SUPPOSED to sound to an audience.  Very often I have to iterate between testing the backing track in the live system and going back to the studio to make corrections to adjust the sound of the backing track to better integrate seamlessly and correctly into the live production.

My problem in this regard is no different than anyone that tries to use headphones or studio monitors to create a sound intended to be used live...and then are surprised when their sound on the live system doesn't match what they dialed in on the studio setup.  That's not the Helix fault because the Helix can do either.  It's the simple fact that the two environments are DRAMATICALLY different and have to be accounted for.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, DunedinDragon said:

a modeler is really just a recording studio in a box


Precisely this! - Good point.

 

As I noted earlier, there are endless threads on here regarding the old favourites such as, “the amp in the room”, “my headphones don’t sound like my monitors”, and  “the preset I bought from x, or downloaded from Customtone doesn’t sound like the YouTube video”, etc.

 

Until people finally realise that a modelling system is actually providing a fully produced sound, akin to sitting in a control room with a whole bunch of studio quality effects - this thing will continue. Along with the myth that a preset created by someone else will sound identical to the video - even if you had the same guitar, same gauge strings and “touch” of the person who created it - not possible, it is not and never can be the same.

 

The only thing missing from the “studio control room” analogy is the engineer with years of experience of getting all that gear to create exactly the sound required. Sadly the Helix doesn’t provide a preset, snapshot or foot switch for that. What it does give you is the ability to arrange, mix and match all the these FX, amps and cabs into just about any configuration you wish - without blowing up anything or electrocuting yourself. The idea is to play with it all until you achieve the desired result. There are no shortcuts. I have been at this for a long time and have a rack full of stuff that cost many thousands and now sits in the corner gathering dust. My Helix covers most eventualities and essentially cost less than my Akai S950 sampler when new back in 1989. Granted Helix is not a sampler, but neither does it require floppy disks!

 

To quote “cruisinon2” in the post above:

 

“It'll either sink in eventually, or it won't.”

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, SaschaFranck said:

Now, what all the engineers involved in such productions are doing, would be to crosscheck their mixes through a whole variety of playback systems. This is why you find a pair of cheap monitors on pretty much any studio desk. This is also why you'd leave your studio with your attempts copied to your smartphone, so you could listen to them while driving or biking home in your car stereo or through earbuds under less than desirable listening conditions.

 

Alright, in case you wouldn't know already: Why am I posting this? Because modern amp modeling suddenly brought all that to the guitarists table.

 

First of all... your entire post was great... thanks for taking the time. 

 

What you mention in the paragraph I quote is something I learned back in the mid 80's. For many years I spent 48 weeks a year living on the road in hotel rooms and to keep my sanity (and avoid drugs/alcohol) I travelled with a Tascam Postastudio, a Roland Drum machine, a Rockman, and a good microphone. 

 

My initial recordings only sounded good on the ghetto blaster I had to mix on and headphones. Headphones ALWAYS sounded best, but that doesn't mean it was good!  The flaws were exposed as I played the songs back on other systems.  It took a lot of time, and a set of speakers (not headphones) I could trust before I could create mixes that translated well on most playbacks.  (for those not aware, this is a never ending learning curve)

 

As you say... this is now applicable to guitar players with the advancements in modeling. Some of us gracefully transitioned thanks to past experience, while others are starting where I did back in 1984... and where most have started at some point. The faster a person can move past this hurdle, the better. 

 

As much as the OP insists his tone's don't need to translate, he doesn't seem to realize that is exactly what he needs... and it starts on speakers, not headphones.

 

No sense in me typing it again... I'll just quote it... 

 

2 hours ago, datacommando said:

To quote “cruisinon2” in the post above:

“It'll either sink in eventually, or it won't.”

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, datacommando said:


Oh dear, you appear to have fallen down the rabbit hole, chasing that elusive Will o’the Wisp that is simply - vibrations in the air!

 

Your predicament of trying to get a grip on this is just another one of the seemingly endless circle of people posting the same thing on these forums, over and over. It has been done to death.

 

When you finally achieve your audio nirvana please let us know, then we can all disagree with that.

 

Haha yep sounds about right lol. I am going to keep trying though because I do want my Helix to sound as good as it can particularly in the high gain, I've already discovered some improvements. I'll be on my third set of speakers later this week!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, MGW-Alberta said:

There are pros and cons between using IRs versus the cab sims that come with Helix.  Cab sims give you control over lots of parameters but no mix control that I ever found on the cab blocks that I've tried.  I admit I have not tried them all but I think it's not likely that some would have it and others not but I guess I could be wrong.  IRs don't have that flexibility but they do have a mix control.  You can fool around with the mix to try to get some "reality" back into your sound.  I'm guessing you could find at least a partial path forward to your goal; get you closer.

Yes.. lowering right down sounded weird but if you take it down to about 80 per cent it sounds rather good, almost rockman like actually and this is very useful, definitely a little trick I'll be using on some patches

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, cruisinon2 said:

 

Let me save you the suspense...you can't "new gear" your way out of this problem.... because the monitors are not the problem. And the headphones are not the problem. The problem is that the monitors are monitors, and the headphones are headphones...you could spend the rest of your life trying to make one behave like the other, and you will fail. Every time. You must adapt to what they are capable of doing, because they're not gonna change...their frequency responses and projection capabilities are what they are. As such, you could invest in a pair of every model of studio monitor on earth, and none of those will sound just like your headphones, either. It's a losing battle. The need to make EQ adjustments from one output to another is inevitable, and that will never change. Learning to use different pieces of gear as they are intended to be used, and accepting the strengths and limitations of each, is the only way to get happy results. Anything else is an unattainable fantasy.

 

Either way, good luck...I have no intention of repeating myself any further. It'll either sink in eventually, or it won't.

 

That's not the reason I've changed my speakers. I've changed them as an upgrade for my overall preset tone. I wasn't expecting to match the headphone sound doing that. What you've said above, I know all that, that's basically what I've been saying all this time!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't want to sound dismissive chaps but I think my original point has somehow got lost or sidetracked.

 

Some of what has been said above is interesting, but I'm afraid quoting silly comments like 'it will either sink in or it won't ' shows me that it hasn't sunk in for some of you.

 

If you guys had read my posts properly you would know that I was never trying to match my tones via different output devices. I wasn't unhappy with my tones through my speakers. I don't even use headphones regularly! My point was simply that the character of the distortion was very different, that's all. That's what I wanted to know about, not how my presets sound from one device to the next, I had no desire to change that. I just wanted to know about the distortion character within the preset.

 

Somehow this discussion has become an in depth lecture (quite often in a patronising sense) about how to operate a modelling device for different scenario's.  All very interesting but not what I was saying at all. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Paulzx said:

If you guys had read my posts properly you would know that I was never trying to match my tones via different output devices.

 

Yeah... I think we all get that.

 

14 hours ago, Paulzx said:

I just wanted to know about the distortion character within the preset.

 

It's been explained in depth on this thread by many .... most saying the same thing in many different ways.

 

14 hours ago, Paulzx said:

I don't want to sound dismissive chaps

 

The importance of what has been explained in this thread should not be dismissed! 

 

Good luck with your journey.... it's time for me to tag out on this thread. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Paulzx said:

Yes.. lowering right down sounded weird but if you take it down to about 80 per cent it sounds rather good, almost rockman like actually and this is very useful, definitely a little trick I'll be using on some patches

 

Glad I could be of some help. 

 

There are other ways to sharpen up your sound and just like the IR tip they involve turning things down.  Try backing off on preamp gain, overdrive/distortion gain, time based f/x mix levels and things like that.   I have tried a few patches downloaded from the Custom Tone area and they invariably have most things set way too high for someone like me and I suspect you.  I prefer my tone to have some bite, some edge, some in-your-face sharpness to it.

 

You can also dig a little deeper into your amp block settings and back off on those things on the last page like sag, hum, ripple, bias, etc.  Lots of people are afraid to touch that stuff but if you like a sharp sound then a stiffer amp can usually help and that means turning most of those things down.  If you haven't already done so, do some reading and learn what those parameters do.  In addition to backing some stuff off sometimes you can see improvement by simply re-ordering your blocks.  Do some reading about that as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/12/2021 at 4:43 PM, MGW-Alberta said:

 

Glad I could be of some help. 

 

There are other ways to sharpen up your sound and just like the IR tip they involve turning things down.  Try backing off on preamp gain, overdrive/distortion gain, time based f/x mix levels and things like that.   I have tried a few patches downloaded from the Custom Tone area and they invariably have most things set way too high for someone like me and I suspect you.  I prefer my tone to have some bite, some edge, some in-your-face sharpness to it.

 

You can also dig a little deeper into your amp block settings and back off on those things on the last page like sag, hum, ripple, bias, etc.  Lots of people are afraid to touch that stuff but if you like a sharp sound then a stiffer amp can usually help and that means turning most of those things down.  If you haven't already done so, do some reading and learn what those parameters do.  In addition to backing some stuff off sometimes you can see improvement by simply re-ordering your blocks.  Do some reading about that as well.

 

Yep that's the main issue, getting a sharper, bitier distortion but you want clarity in that so I think those tips are the right way to go, I'll certainly have a go at backing those settings off a bit. I do find with the amp sims and IR's that you end up with quite a fizzy tone a lot of the time and I'm always trying to dial that out for a more authentic crackle break up type of distortion. You know when you've got something good because it sounds good all over the neck, not just on certain riffs or positions but its not easy to get out of the box so to speak

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...